Ct >e  Cntploper 

an&  tyz 

iLafaor  ®nton 


BY 

MARCUS  M.  MARKS 

New  York 


Reprint  from  “The  Independent,’’  May  26,  1910 
At  th^nstance  of  friends  who  feel  that  the  article  should 
have  a wide  circulation. 


C^e  employ 

and  tbe 

labor  Onion 

By  Marcus  M.  Marks 

[Probably  no  man  in  New  York  City  has  done 
! more  work  in  settling  industrial  disputes  than  Mr. 

I Marks.  Tho  actively  interested  in  all  good  public 
I movements,  whether  political,  social,  or  ethical,  he 
gives  most  of  his  attention  to  The  National  Civic 

I Federation,  of  whose  Executive  Committee  he  is  a 
member,  and  to  the  Roosevelt  Industrial  Peace  Founda- 
\ tion. — Editor.] 


F.  view  of  existing  conditions  in 
the  industrial  world  every  effort 
should  be  made  to  throw  light  on 
the  important  question  of  union  re- 
lations for  the  purpose  of  arriving 
at  a better  understanding  between 
capital  and  labor. 

The  union  has  many  men  who 
devote  all  their  time  to  the  single 
purpose  of  organization,  and  these 
men  become  experienced,  well 
trained  and  present  their  case  intel- 
ligently and  forcefully;  on  the 
other  hand,  the  employers  do  not 
discuss  their  attitude  to  organized 


? 


291 75 


labor  with  sufficient  freedom  or 
frequency  to  enlighten  the  popu- 
lar mind. 

The  Closed-Shop  Issue. — Those 
who  are  experienced  in  mediation 
and  conciliation  in  industrial  dis- 
putes approach  with  diffidence 
those  cases  in  which  the  demand  for 
the  “closed  shop”  is  the  cause  of 
the  difficulty.  Strikes  resulting 
from  a demand  of  this  nature  are 
the  most  obstinate;  it  is  almost  im- 
possible to  settle  them.  When 
wages,  hours  of  labor  or  other  con- 
ditions of  employment  are  at  issue, 
it  is  usually  possible,  with  calmness 
and  skill,  to  bring  about  a speedy 
adjustment,  because  in  these  in- 
stances there  is  no  basic  principle 
involved.  These  cases  may  be  dis- 
cussed as  practical  business  matters 
with  little  passion  by  both  employ- 
ers and  employees,  and  they  lend 
themselves  readily  to  compromise; 
friendly  conference  and  the  study 
of  economic  conditions  soon  estab- 


4 


lish  a fair  basis  for  settlement.  But 
when  the  closed  shop  is  the  issue 
both  sides  usually  feel  that  a ques- 
tion of  principle  is  involved,  and 
the  fight  is  apt  to  be  bitter  and  to 
the  finish. 

The  unions  often  undertake  the 
struggle  for  the  closed  shop,  even 
when  only  a very  few  non-union 
men  stand  in  the  way  of  complete 
organization.  In  one  industry  five 
thousand  men  struck  because  eight 
men  were  employed  who  would 
not  join  the  union.  New  unions, 
untrained  and  inexperienced,  are 
the  most  likely  to  go  to  extremes  in 
such  a contention.  In  like  manner 
new  associations  of  employers  are 
the  most  difficult  to  reason  with. 

Classification  of  Shops  in  Their 
Relation  to  the  Unions. — In  study- 
ing the  relations  between  the  em- 
ployer and  the  union  it  is  desirable 
clearly  to  define  the  terms  open 
shop  and  closed  shop.  The  prob- 
lem before  us  is  not  a simple  one. 


5 


There  are  employers  who  are 
friendly  to  the  union,  those  who 
are  indifferent  and  those  who  are 
unfriendly.  Upon  the  attitude  of 
the  employer  to  the  union  work 
ingman  and  vice  versa,  as  well  asi 
upon  other  conditions  stated  below, 
will  depend  the  complexion  of  the 
shop.  The  so-called  open  shop 
and  closed  shop  are  the  two  main 
divisions — there  are  at  least  seven 
distinct  subdivisions  in  the  classi- 
fication of  shops  with  respect  to 
union  relations. 

First. — There  is  the  anti-union 
shop.  Here  the  employer  is  em- 
phatically and  frankly  opposed  to 
the  organization  of  his  working- 
men; this  employer  has  either  suf- 
fered from  strikes  or  fears  their 
possibility;  he  will  not  knowingly 
employ  a union  man  and  will  dis- 
charge an  employee  who  is  dis- 
covered to  be  a member  of  the 
union ; he  may  even  go  so  far  as  to 
require  each  employee,  before  his 


6 


engagement,  to  sign  a card  to  the 
effect  that  he  is  not  a member  of 
any  union  and  will  not  join  one 
while  in  his  employ.  ''This  shop  is 
frequently  confounded  with  the 
open  shop.  But  it  is  not  open;-it  is 
closed  against  union  men,  just  as 
the  shop  ordinarily  termed  closed 
shop  is  closed  against  non-union 
employees. 

Second. — There  is  the  non-union 
shop,  where,  without  any  animus 
against  unions  on  the  part  of  the 
employer,  there  happen  to  be  no 
union  men  employed.  Such  a shop 
may  be  situated  in  a locality  where 
workingmen  are  not  organized. 
This  shop,  while  practically  non- 
union, is  technically  an  open  shop, 
there  being  no  discrimination 
against  the  union. 

Third. — We  have  the  typical 
open  shop,  in  which  union  and 
non-union  men  work  freely  side  by 
side,  without  discrimination.  The 
employer  may  be  indifferent,  neu- 


7 


tral  or  fri-endly;  he  does  not  ac- 
tively recognize  the  union  affilia- 
tion of  his  employees,  neither  is 
the  union  officially  in  evidence,  as 
there  is  no  active  shop  chairman 
representing  the  union  employees. 

Fourth. — There  is  the  open 
shop,  in  which  union  and  non- 
union men  work  side  by  side  with 
the  knowledge  and  consent  both  of 
the  employer  and  of  the  union; 
there  is  either  a written  agreement 
or  an  understanding  between  this 
employer  and  his  union  working- 
men establishing  the  open-shop  ar- 
rangement officially;  there  may  be 
a shop  chairman  selected  by  the 
union,  but  his  authority  is  limited 
according  to  the  number  of  union 
employees.  We  have  in  this  class 
the  first  stage  of  union  recognition. 

Fifth. — There  is  the  union  shop 
in  which  all  workingmen  are  mem- 
bers of  the  union,  but  without  any 
agreement  or  official  sanction  from 
the  employer.  The  shop  organiza- 


8 


tion  by  its  own  propaganda  keeps 
up  this  condition  of  unionism.  The 
non-recognition  of  the  union  by  the 
employer  technically  differentiates 
this  from  the  typical  closed  shop. 
The  employer  in  this  “union  shop” 
may  possibly  not  even  be  aware  of 
the  fact  that  all  his  men  are  mem- 
bers of  the  union  until  a strike  or 
other  cause  reveals  this  condition. 
This  subdivision  represents  a tem- 
porary condition  which  soon  de- 
velops into  a closed  or  an  open 
shop. 

Sixth. — There  is  the  closed  shop 
with  the  open  union.  In  this  case 
the  employer  has  an  agreement 
with  the  union  that  only  members 
in  good  standing  may  work  in  his 
shop,  with  the  stipulation,  how- 
ever, that  he  retains  the  open  mar- 
ket to  secure  help  and  may  employ 
non-union  men  provided  they  join 
the  union  on  beginning  work,  the 
union  agreeing  to  accept  these  men 
at  once  as  members. 


9 


Seventh. — There  is  the  closed 
shop  with  the  closed  union.  This 
is  the  most  complete  form  of  union 
recognition.  Only  union  men  in 
good  standing  may  be  employed. 
If  men  lose  their  good  standing  in 
the  union  they  must  be  discharged. 
The  employer  may  not  go  into  the 
open  market  to  seek  labor,  but  must 
apply  to  the  union. 

The  union  demands  the  closed 
shop  for  the  purpose  of  maintain- 
ing the  advantages  gained  as  the 
result  of  a strike  or  of  peaceful  ne- 
gotiations, which  advantages  the 
union  fears  may  be  lost  unless  the 
complete  control  of  the  shop  is 
within  its  grasp.  To  this  end  the 
union  offers  to  co-operate  with  the 
employer  by  influencing  its  mem- 
bers to  live  up  to  their  contracts. 

The  employer,  on  the  other 
hand,  rarely  establishes  the  closed 
shop  voluntarily.  His  fear  is  that 
he  will  lose  control  of  his  business 
and  place  his  capital  at  the  risk 


IO 


of  irresponsible  parties  who  are  not 
fully  posted  on  general  trade  con- 
ditions. He  also  objects  to  the  vis- 
its of  the  walking  delegates  with 
their  occasional  arbitrary  show  of 
power. 

Attitude  of  the  Employer  To- 
ward Union  Regulations. — All  em- 
ployers, irrespective  of  their  atti- 
tude to  the  union,  agree  in  oppos- 
ing the  policy  of  some  of  the  unions 
with  respect  to  the  following: 

I.  Restriction  of  output  and  lim- 
itation of  machinery. 

When  a man  does  not  do  his  best 
he  wrongs  his  employers  as  well  as 
himself ; more  than  this,  he  is  apt  to 
dwarf  his  latent  faculties  and  crip- 
ple his  future  prospects. 

Our  American  workingman,  to 
keep  his  supremacy,  must  bring  out 
the  best  that  is  in  him  and  not  de- 
generate into  a hum-drum  aver- 
age. The  advanced  unions  gener- 
ally recognize  this  principle. 


II 


The  employer,  to  keep  his 
product  successfully  in  the  mar- 
ket, is  compelled  by  competition 
to  introduce  new  methods  and  new 
machines  that  bring  about  economy 
of  manufacture.  Broadly  speak- 
ing, labor-saving  machinery  does 
not  reduce,  but  increases,  the  ulti- 
mate demand  for  labor — the  hard- 
ship, if  any,  is  but  temporary. 
Whoever  opposes  the  introduction 
of  improved  machinery  opposes 
progress. 

2.  Limitation  of  Apprentices. 

All  employers  disapprove  undue 
limitation  of  apprentices,  and  feel 
that  every  youth  desiring  to  learn  a 
trade  should  have  the  opportunity 
to  do  so.  The  employers  have  no 
faith  in  the  policy  that  restricts 
the  number  of  apprentices  to  a 
small  percentage  for  fear  of  bring- 
ing burdens  on  the  trade.  They  feel 
that  every  mechanic  is  a valuable 
asset,  a producer,  a consumer  and 
an  important  member  of  society. 


12 


3-  Uniform  wage. 

The  uniform  wage  is  generally 
disapproved  by  employers,  and 
many  wise  union  leaders  now 
condemn  it.  It  is  apparent  that 
no  two  men  have  equal  ability, 
and  there  should  be  opportunity 
for  the  bright,  quick  man  to 
forge  ahead.  Nor  should  the  un- 
fortunate, dull  workingman  be 
forced  out  of  employment  by  a 
general  wage  scale  which  the  em- 
ployer cannot  afford  to  pay  this 
slow  worker;  for  the  minimum 
wage,  when  established  by  the 
union,  is  usually  pushed  up  to  a 
point  which  forces  the  employer 
to  discharge  the  under-average 
workingman.  The  introduction  of 
the  uniform  wage  may  thus  make 
the  employer  a party  to  working 
a cruel  hardship  on  the  wage- 
earner. 

4.  Secondary  boycott. 

The  secondary  boycott  is  uni- 
versally and  strongly  condemned 


13 


by  employers  and  by  the  public. 
While  many  excuse  those  who  re- 
frain from  patronizing  a man 
whose  methods  of  business  are  un- 
just and  oppressive  (this  is  called 
the  primary  boycott),  the  punish- 
ment of  a third  party  because  he 
refuses  to  join  in  such  a boycott 
(which  is  termed  the  secondary 
boycott)  is  a coercive  measure 
which  finds  no  sufficient  apology. 

5.  The  sympathetic  strike. 

When  workingmen,  particularly 
those  who  are  under  contract  with 
the  employers,  stop  work,  not  be- 
cause of  any  differences  of  their 
own,  but  in  sympathy  with  striking 
union  workingmen,  perhaps  in  an 
entirely  different  industry,  such 
action  is  unanimously  condemned 
by  employers  and  by  the  public. 
While  the  spirit  of  sacrifice,  engen- 
dered by  a fellow  feeling  with  those 
in  the  same  general  cause  of  labor, 
is  truly  to  be  admired,  its  method 
of  expression  by  the  sympathetic 


14 


striker  is  in  every  way  evil — it 
loses  the  confidence  and  good  will 
of  employers  who  are  made  to  suf- 
fer for  the  acts  of  others.  It  weak- 
ens the  cause  of  collective  bargain- 
ing, and  thus  undermines  the  use- 
fulness of  the  union.  The  sympa- 
thy exp  rest  in  the  sympathetic 
strike  might  more  wisely  show  it- 
self in  financial  and  moral  support 
on  the  part  of  the  union  workers 
remaining  in  their  places  rather 
than  by  actual  cessation  of  labor, 
which  leaves  more  unemployed  to 
be  assisted  and  less  wages  to  be 
used  in  such  assistance. 

6.  Compensation  for  accidents. 

Employers  agree  that  the  pres- 
ent system  of  liability  insurance 
is  unjust  and  ineffective.  Many 
favor  the  new  thought  of  prompt 
and  direct  compensation  for  ac- 
cidents ; but  if  they  are  to  be 
responsible  for  injuries  resulting 
from  negligence  of  employees  they 


15 


will  insist  on  full  liberty  in  the 
selection  and  discharge  of  help, 
which  liberty  is  not  allowed  in  the 
closed  shop. 

Conciliation. 

Differences  between  labor  and 
capital  can  best  be  adjusted  by 
round-table  conferences,  which  are 
educational  and  conciliatory.  The 
offices  of  disinterested  third  parties 
of  experience  are  often  very  valu- 
able. 

The  round  table  is  selected  be- 
cause, figuratively,  it  is  demo- 
cratic, having  no  head  and  no  foot, 
and  because  there  are  no  sharp 
corners  between  you  and  your 
neighbor. 

The  labor  question  is  one  which 
concerns  the  relations  between  man 
and  man  and  should  be  approached 
in  a fraternal  spirit.  There  should 
be  no  patting  on  the  shoulder,  no 
paternalism,  no  charity.  The 
workingman,  as  a rule,  desires  no 

16 


favors.  He  feels  that  he  has  a 
right  to  a light  workroom,  with 
proper  air  and  sanitation;  to  a fair 
wage,  which  will  permit  him  not 
only  to  live,  but  to  enjoy  life. 

Every  one  should  approach  the 
labor  question  carefully  and  intel- 
ligently. No  one  should  ever  take 
sides  on  impulse,  but  only  after 
full  and  fair  investigation  of  all 
the  conditions.  Justice  should  be 
the  aim.  There  are  good  unions 
and  bad  unions;  there  are  good 
corporations  and  firms  and  bad 
ones;  each  should  be  judged  ac- 
cording to  its  merits.  Every  effort 
toward  organization  for  a good 
purpose  should  be  encouraged  and 
then  the  association  be  judged  by 
its  acts.  Prejudice  should  be  elim- 
inated; judging  beforehand,  judg- 
ing without  knowledge,  is  im- 
moral and  dangerous.  Encourage- 
ment of  either  side  in  a dispute 
without  full  knowledge  may  bring 
great  hardship  even  with  friendli- 


17 


est  intent.  The  controlling  power 
should  be  the  spirit  of  justice. 
Investigation  Board. 

How  are  we  to  get  the  facts  to 
aid  us  in  arriving  at  a proper  judg- 
ment in  cases  of  labor  difficulties? 
There  is  no  adequate  way  at  pres- 
ent. It  seems  to  me  that  the  State 
should  establish  machinery  for  the 
fair  investigation  of  important  in- 
dustrial disputes,  particularly  in 
public  utilities,  either  before  or  im- 
mediately after  a strike.  I have  not 
worked  out  the  details  of  a plan, 
but  suggest,  tentatively,  that  it 
might  be  well,  on  request  of  either 
party,  that  the  State  ask  the  em- 
ployers to  select  two  men,  the  em- 
ployees two  and  these  four  to  se- 
lect a fifth  and  sixth  to  complete 
the  board  of  investigation.  If 
either  side  decline  to  select  its  two 
representatives  on  the  board  within 
a reasonable  time,  then  the  State 
might  appoint  two  chosen  from 
the  same  industrial  class  to  repre- 

18 


sent  that  side.  The  reason  that  six. 
men  are  here  suggested,  instead  of 
five,  is  that  two  impartial  judges 
will  reinforce  each  other  and  hold 
a stronger  balance  than  one  would. 
Not  being  an  arbitration,  a single 
deciding  vote  is  not  necessary.  The 
report  of  this  board  should  be 
promptly  made  public;  then  pub- 
lic sentiment  will  assert  itself;  the 
strike  will  have  intelligent  support 
or  disapproval  and  justice  will 
more  readily  be  secured.  I would 
not  at  this  time  go  as  far  as  the 
Canadian  act  does,  nor  as  the  Mas- 
sachusetts act  contemplates,  to  pre- 
vent strikes  and  lockouts;  it  might 
be  well  to  omit  any  compulsory 
features  except  those  of  fair  inves- 
tigation and  publicity. 

A voluntary  board,  selected  in 
each  case  from  the  particular  in- 
dustry involved  in  the  trouble,  will 
be  better  posted  in  the  special  situ- 
ation than  a standing  State  board, 

r~— 


19 


a ..  , 3 0112  061730831 

fiuential  witn  me  puune;  nu  n 

would  be  possible  to  get  men 
of  the  highest  standing  in  the 
community  to  serve  in  single  cases, 
men  whose  services  could  not  be 
secured  on  a permanent  State 
board.  Let  us  hope  for  the  early 
establishment  of  such  a court  of 
investigation  in  every  State  of  the 
Union. 


20 


